Many Israelis want to know: why didn't the soldiers attacked by a U.S. Army major-turned-terrorist return fire?

When a Muslim goes, well, Muslim in Israel he is typically shot to death by someone--say, a reserve soldier--within seconds of screaming "Allah Akbar."

In contrast with the Israeli experience, it took 10 minutes before a civilian police officer at FortHood was able to shoot and stop Muslim fanatic Nidal Malik Hasan.

How could that happen? How could so many people trained in the strategies and tactics of modern warfare be so defenseless?

The answer--and this may astonish many Americans--is that the victims were unarmed.U.S. soldiers are not allowed to carry guns for personal protection, even on a 340-acre base quartering more than 50,000 troops.

Contrary to President Obama's crocodile tears, his administration is bent on further disarming the U.S. military, and all Americans. Obama and his people will not rest until every American is a sitting duck..

Postscript: Israeli teachers, from kindergarten on up, are also armed; so, a Virginia Tech-type slaughter is highly unlikely at an Israeli university.

Israelis, who have had to combat terrorism all their lives, are not afraid of guns. They are an armed people, ready, willing, and able to defend themselves and their country.

Israel has different laws than the USA does, for better or for worse. Also, Isreal is considered an enemy by nearly everyone (if not everyone) surrounding them. They have had to fight to defend themselves and "their" land since they created their nation (I'm not going to discuss the rights or wrongs of that here).

Believe it or not, wingtards, the USA is has 1 very good ally to our North, and we're lucky that our southern neighbor is mostly our ally as well. We are NOT surrounded by hostile neighbors, and our needs and politics are different.

Wingtards wish to solve every little difference of opinion by violence. I am sorry for the loss of lives at Fort Hood, and I'm sorry for the loss of lives at VA Tech (which, by the way, I don't "get" how that "connects" to muslims, but hey: what the fuck??), but I don't agree with arming all of our citizens to the teeth in some weirded out attempt to make us all "safer."

Read the 2009 Darwin awards to see how safe some citizens were with all of their guns at the ready.

While the LOYAL opposition (represented, in small part, here) still has some "say" in our so-called "democracy," I stand up for NOT arming everyone to the teeth in some weird excuse of saving our "freedoms" or whatever other bullshit the guns & ammo industry is peddling today.

And right on, Celia: yes, the Israelis allow openly gay men & women to serve in their military without any fuss... and so, if wingtards are just so in love with the Israeli "ways," then please get down with allowing openly gay men & women to serve with honor and distinction in the US armed forces. I can certainly endorse that!

And I'll end with my old tired refrain: brought to you by the guns & ammo industry so that they can make lots of $$$$ off of credulous Republics - proving the old addage: a fool & his/her money is easily parted.

Wonder how many of the wingtards actually clicked on the link provided-- which proved the letter to be incorrect at best.

"Prohibits the carrying of non-Government owned or issued weapons or ammunition"

That would not include weapons or ammunition carried by soldiers, since those are considered to be government issue/owned.

It also prohibits anyone to carry if they are under the influence. Scary stuff, indeed. There is nothing in there that prohibits the carrying of weapons by military personnel.

You also don't shoot someone for saying "Allah Akbar" because it's not necessarily a battle cry. I means "God is good." Shooting them would be the equivalent of shooting someone for going around yelling, "Praise God!"

I'm actually amazed that it took this long for this rant to get written and sent around the interwebs. As soon as I heard about Ft. Hood I knew that some wingnut was going to write some nonsense like this.

And AlModerate is correct, that regulation doesn't prevent soldiers from carrying weapons. As if the Army would implement such a regulation in the first place.

Furthermore, the attack occured against soldiers who probably would have never thought that they would be in any danger that day and therefore probably choose not to be armed.

Not only were they in the middle of a huge military base, but the attack took place in a medical facility and a graduation ceremony. Why would a soldier going to these places consider themselves in danger and therefore in need of carrying a weapon? Probably because they are rational human beings who don't imagine themselves as secret Jack Bauers, unlike the wingnuts who write and believe this crap.

I think that they should photoshop Sarah Palin's face on that Israeli female soldiers body and send that around. It would be more, uh, "useful" to certain US citizens than the rest of this bullshit diatribe. fap fap fap

Welcome to the Right-Wing Forward Museum

MyRightWingDad.net is a museum dedicated to following the course of American history through a unique lens -- the emails "Red-America" forwards worldwide. Take a look around the archive using the keywords below, and leave a comment or two.

This museum displays unedited, often offensive and untrue material with no endorsement intended by curators or contributors.